Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction and resilience into the post-2015 agenda

Indonesia hosted another consultative meeting to determine ways to mainstream disaster risk reduction (DRR) and resilience into the post-2015 development agenda on Feb. 19-20. One of the main outcomes expected from this meeting is to discuss and offer concrete recommendations for the most essential aspects of DRR and resilience building that could be integrated into priority goals, targets and indicators.

DRR and resilience have been an integral part of most of the deliberations on global development within the United Nations. Here in New York, efforts to link DRR and resilience with poverty eradication, climate change and even with conflict have been increasing.

Due to the fact that no country, even the most developed, is immune from the impact of natural disasters, DRR and resilience have become one of the rare pertinent issues of common interest of both the developing and developed world.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), a political manifesto of the Millennium Declaration, which was launched in 2000, failed to address the importance of DRR and resilience as the focus of the MDGs had been focused on individual basic needs and well-being.

The Millennium Declaration, however, did make a few references to disasters as stipulated in Paragraph 23 of its Chapter IV: Protecting our common environment and in paragraph 26 of Chapter VI: Protecting the vulnerable.

Even so, the Millennium Declaration, which is seen as a more legitimate universal declaration than the politically crafted MDGs, is unable to address the core of DRR and resilience.

This is because the references made in the Millennium Declaration are too general, i.e. to intensify cooperation to reduce the number and effects of natural and manmade disasters, and too narrow, i.e. to spare no effort to ensure that children and all civilian populations that suffer disproportionately the consequences of natural disasters, genocide, armed conflicts and other humanitarian emergencies are given every assistance and protection so that they can resume normal life as soon as possible.
The formulation of the post-2015 development agenda will be completely different from the process in formulating MDGs as it will be more inclusive in the sense that it involves all stakeholders, including locals. The post-2015 process is also seen as more thorough as it has commenced in late 2012 to allow ample time for consultative deliberation.

With that in mind and the evidence-proved catastrophic impacts of natural disasters that the world has been witnessing in the last decade, the chance for DRR and resilience to be integrated into the development agenda of the post-2015 should be relatively fair.

Within this perspective, many have pinned their hopes on the leadership of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, as the first global champion on DRR as well as cochair of the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, to ensure the inclusion of DRR into the post-2015 development framework.

However, in the highly political process that involves the entire United Nations member states’ agendas and vested interests, such as the post-2015, relying on the evidence-based urgency of DRR and resilience and the democratic process of the post-2015 will not suffice.

Similarly, it is not enough to place the responsibility on the shoulders of Yudhoyono alone. Stronger campaigning is required and more effective strategy at all levels, the global, regional and national, is critically important to mobilize further political support for the inclusion of DRR and resilience into the post-2015 development agenda.

An informal discussion was organized by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) for the member states of the United Nations in New York last month.

At the discussion, the head of Climate Change at the Overseas Development Institute, Tom Mitchell, proposed to member states to calibrate targets for DRR and resilience in the post-2015 framework while balancing prudence and ambition as part of the strategy to mainstream DRR and resilience into the post-2015 development agenda.

Mitchell further proposed four options of goals for DRR and resilience should the post-2015 process agree to make DRR and/or resilience a standalone goal. Those options are: (a) to reduce risk and build resilience to disasters for all; (b) disaster-resilient nations; (c) disaster-resilient communities; or (d) resilience to shocks and stresses.

Formulating a set of universal goals for the post-2015 development agenda, including a universal goal for DRR and resilience is comprehensible due to the need for drawing support from all nations on the set goal(s).

However, it is important to take into consideration the special needs of individual countries as well as the different starting level each country has due to the different capacity and resources they have with regard to DRR and resilience.

The frequency and intensity of natural disasters that are faced by each country and the impact they entail vis-à-vis the population of the country are also factors of equal importance.

Learning from the shortcoming of the MDGs, what should also be addressed in the coming post-2015 DRR and resilience framework is the “how” aspect. The MDGs left out this very important aspect of achieving its goals as there is no clear and direct framework to guide, support and assist countries, especially the developing and least developed ones, in achieving the MDGs.

In this regard, the coming post-2015 DRR and resilience framework should also put into context the goal of partnership that can contribute to the strengthening of the capacity of DRR and resilience not only at the national level but also at the local/ sub-national level.

The writer is an Indonesian diplomat in New York. The views expressed are her own.

The Calabanga experience: Mainstreaming DRR-CCA into local governance is good governance

The sweetest reward is a resilient community.” This is how Mayor Evelyn Yu summarized her experience working with CARE and partners. She is the municipal mayor of Calabanga in Camarines Sur, a municipality that is frequently battered by strong typhoons.

Mayor Yu was first elected for the said position in 1998. Barely a few months into office, Typhoon ‘Loleng’ (Babs), categorized by PAGASA as one of the strongest tropical cyclones, hit the Philippines on October 21-26, 1998. It was also considered as one of the top five typhoons which caused the heaviest damage in Southern and Central Luzon.

Like any other Local Government Unit, the municipality of Calabanga did not give much attention to disaster preparedness and mitigation before. Their knowledge and experience was limited to the conduct of emergency response during a typhoon’s aftermath. Disaster reduction, mitigation and preparedness were still out of the picture.

When Mayor Yu was re-elected in 2004, four tropical cyclones (Unding, Violeta, Winnie and Yoyong) hit the Luzon area in a span of 18 days from November 16 to December 2. Typhoon Unding gravely devastated the Bicol region, including Calabanga and its poorest barangays along the coastal areas.

This devastating event motivated Mayor Yu to prioritize DRR, and started the partnership between CARE and the LGU of Calabanga. The partnership started through a CARE relief project, followed by DRR that built on the initial emergency response.

Mayor Yu is one LGU executive who immediately supported the follow-up DRR projects of CARE. She exhibited genuine interest for disaster preparedness as she sat all throughout the training sessions conducted for municipal officials and staff. She was very different from other officials who were only present during the opening activities.

She directly headed the development of the municipality’s contingency plan and actively participated in drills. She also joined the community as they planted mangrove seedlings along the banks of San Miguel Bay. She generously provided various kinds of support for the project, including the allocation of funding for all three phases of ACCORD.

On her third and last term as Mayor of Calabanga, she is confident that their community already has the capacity to handle emergency situations and carry-out measures to reduce disaster impacts. Towards the last stretch of the ACCORD projects, Mayor Yu fully supported the move to mainstreaming DRR and CCA in the local development planning processes in order to sustain what has been achieved in the last seven years.

Led by Mayor Yu, Calabanga earned the distinction of being the first municipality in Camarines Sur to have developed a municipal contingency plan that is linked community contingency plans..

The municipality is expanding and sustaining its successful mangrove reforestation activities in the coastal communities of Cagsao, Sibobo, Sabang and Punta Tarawal, and has started reforestation of upland areas, realizing the risk reduction and ecosystem services these reforestation activities provide. The mangrove reforestation, especially in Cagsao has earned so much recognition that it has become a learning and tourism destination. It has also opened new partnerships for similar undertakings and has been considered a favourite spot for outreach activities of various colleges and universities in Bicol. The project has also influenced other municipalities surrounding San Miguel Bay to replicate the said mangrove reforestation project.

Recognizing the link between disasters, climate change and environmental degradation, the municipal government has come up with resolutions supporting BDRRMC of Bgy. Sibobo’s opposition to quarrying in the barangay, and opposing the planned magnetite mining in San Miguel Bay. The municipality has also led the establishment of a fish sanctuary in San Miguel Bay.

The municipal government has consistently supported the capacity building of community facilitators as a means for sustaining DRR in the municipality. Now, community facilitators include the staff of their Sangguniang Bayan members, the Municipal Administrator, fire marshalls, health officers and staff, among others. They have replicated DRR capacity building of communities and schools not covered by the ACCORD projects.

Aware of the need to sustain DRR, Mayor Yu and other LGU officials are allocating funds for the replication of the ACCORD experience until all 48 barangays of Calabanga has been covered.

Earlier, the municipal government has been incorporating DRR activities in the Executive Legislative Agenda and allocating funds for these activities. In 2011, the municipality embarked on mainstreaming DRR in the rationalized Planning System.

(Insert ch 8 a.png)

As a partner in the Foor facility project, the municipality also gained experience in incorporating DRR in livelihoods, by applying DRR mainstreaming in project cycle management.

The municipality, through its DILG officer has also included DRR and solid waste management topics in regular orientation programs conducted for newly-elected barangay officials.

No one can doubt Calabanga’s achievements in terms of improving the DRR capacities of the communities. In fact, Mayor Yu has been invited in numerous national and international gatherings to share their DRR practice in Calabanga. Other municipalities also expressed their interest in learning from Calabanga’s experience by inviting members of municipal government to discuss DRR programs.

As a result of DRR mainstreaming, the municipality of Calabanga has been awarded the Gawad Kalasag, a recognition given to LGUs who exhibited good practices in DRR.

But according to Mayor Yu, while the awards make them doubly proud, they are still mere decorations. What they have learned cannot be bought by money. They key to sustained risk reduction activities is the raised awareness of the ordinary people – about preparedness and taking care of the environment. As such they have already been given the tools to help reduce the adverse effects of typhoons, floods, and storm surge that hit the municipality’s coastal barangays and, in more recent years, even the poblacion barangays.

“The best accomplishment is to be able to share to others what we have learned; to become instrumental in building more resilient communities in the years to come”.

That, for her is what mainstreaming is all about: to be able to have DRR into the consciousness of local executives and staff who take it upon themselves to govern for their people.

(Source: http://accord.org.ph/node/515)

Sharing From Zahid Hasan - Helvetas

The FOLLOWING message is from the mail that has already reached you from Mr. Zahid Hasan Bhai from Helvetas. But we want to document this sharing.


----
Dear Friends,

I would like to profit from this unique mailing list that a number of publications of HELVETAS were discussed/referred during the training sessions. You can find all these documents (including videos) in publication page (http://bangladesh.helvetas.org/en/photos_videos_bangladesh/). 

-----

Resources Link

1. Climate, Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction Integration Guidance (CEDRIG) Part 1 
Click on the link below:
http://www.sdc drr.net/system/files/CEDRIG_Part_I_Aim_Concept_and_Support_Material_EN_Web.pdf

2. Climate, Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction Integration Guidance (CEDRIG) Part 2
Click on the link below:
http://www.sdc-drr.net/system/files/CEDRIG_Part_II_Handbook_EN_Web.pdf


3. Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction Planning Tool
Click on the link below:
https://assets.helvetas.ch/downloads/community_20based_20disaster_20risk_20reduction_20__202010.pdf

4. Integrating Disaster Risks Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation Measures into Development Planning and Processes in Bangladesh by CDMP
Click on the link below:
http://www.dmrd.gov.bd/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=416&Itemid=236

Want to Talk about Mainstreaming DRR??? This is your place.... Start Writing ....

To start with, Please answer the Following questions in the comment section:

1. What do you understand about Mainstreaming DRR?

2. What are your personal and organizational experiences in line with Mainstreaming DRR?

3. What is your expertise in the Mainstreaming DRR process at different level?  

Understanding of CEDRIG

Studying about Mainstreaming DRR automatically will turn someone towards different types of tools, strategies and mechanism. The first tool that I encountered was the CEDRIG. I found it quite amazing because the integration was critical. Even then it is user friendly. The paragraphs below are my understanding of the first part of CEDRIG.

Climate, Environment and Disaster Risk Reduction Integration Guidance – CEDRIG is a way of SDC to find out or investigate whether the present different sort of support, cooperation and planned approach are vulnerable towards the increasing disaster due to climate change, environmental degradation, tectonic movements, effect on GHG emission and the environment.

The CEDRIG is divided into two parts:

1. Rational and Framework of CEDRIG

2. A self explanatory Hands-on guidance practical handbook

Though there are several climate, environment and DRR integration guidance by different development organization. CEDRIG is the tool that is formulated by SDC and applicable to the specific SDC procedures.

As climate change, environmental degradation and frequent disasters can disrupt the process of sustainable development, development organizations follow two different approaches.

(1) Risk perspective – assessment and reduction of risks

(2) Impact perspective - Identification and reduction of impact

They key concept of risk perspective is disaster risk. It results from a combination of different factors. IPCC predicted in its last report that disaster will intensify even further in the coming years. Even in the best scenario, increasing natural and man-made hazards, environmental degradation are inevitable. If we really want to run towards development in this scenario, we must consider ‘increased resilient’ as in combination of Disaster Risk Reduction, Adaptation to Climate change and adaptation to degraded environment which will reduce the vulnerability evidently.

The key concept of impact perspective is mitigation. Mitigation in climate change, environment and in DRR context is all about impact perspective.  

CEDRIG incorporates both perspectives – risk and impact which incorporates the concepts of adaptation to climate change, adaptation to degraded environments, DRR, climate change mitigation and environmental impact mitigation.

CEDRIG is based on the following principles:

Principle 1 - OECD guidance and the Hyogo Framework for Action as references

Principle 2 - Modular approach and flexibility

            There are three modules - (Module 1) Risk and Impact Screening, (Module 2) Detailed Assessment at strategic and programmatic level and (Module 3) Detailed Assessment at project level – this third module has four steps.

Principle 3 - Integration in SDC standard procedures and Project Cycle Management (PCM)

Keeping the perspective approach in following the CEDRIG, the modules are to be followed. When the risk perspective is considered, the module 1: Risk Screening is a must. In this same perspective the module 2: Risk Assessment or the Module 3: Detailed Assessment should be used as tool for climate variability, climate change risks, risks from environmental degradation and risks from tectonic activities. At the time of consideration of Impact perspective, module 1: Impact screening and Module 3:  Impact Assessment should be used as tool for Impacts on GHG emission and environment.

The second and third section discusses about the organizational procedural approaches on using CEGRIG and list of supporting material used for CEDRIG.

   

What is Mainstreaming DRR

As I see it, mainstreaming DRR is a system with which a country/region full-proofs the disaster management. This sounds to be a sustainable solution for disaster losses. Let us look in to some definition from the experts of Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction.

Mainstreaming DRR is inclusion of practical DRR components in all sectoral plans, specific DRR expert units active and effective in sectoral ministries and Agencies Budget lines for DRR integration, “Making communities safer before disaster strike”(strengthening community based disaster preparedness) and far-sighted public governance. (Loy Rego & Arghya Sinha Roy, 2007)

Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction into development is to consider and address risks coming from natural hazards in medium-term strategic development frameworks, legislation and institutional structures, sectoral strategies and policies, budgetary processes, the design and implementation of individual projects and in monitoring and evaluating all of the above (Benson and Twigg, 2007).

Photo: Naimul Islam Moon

According to UNDP & NDMA, Provision of  having standard and sector-specific DRR guidelines for the work of all other sectors, evaluation of strategies and proposed interventions of all other sectors from a DRR perspective and sensitization and advocacy for all during the Emergency Response phase to highlight the importance of mainstreaming DRR.

All of the experts have given emphasis on sector wise strategy development, planning, policy, intervention, guidelines and budgetary issue. The role of NGO, right governance, individual project and active unit of DRR is also important when it comes to Mainstreaming Disaster Management.